Novedad de productos y características intrínsecas de los recursos en la innovación

Autores/as

  • Juan Pablo Camani Universidad Nacional de Río Negro. Escuela de Economía, Administración, y Turismo. Río Negro, Argentina

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.n1.2023.7097

Palabras clave:

recursos, recombinaciones, novedad, productos, innovación

Resumen

En general, la literatura sobre innovación recombinante no especifica la novedad alcanzada al desarrollar productos: resulta de recombinaciones, siempre novedosas, de conocimiento existente. Esta visión limita los tipos de recombinaciones y recursos usados al innovar. No explicaría la diversidad de recursos y recombinaciones asociados con productos con grados particulares de novedad (alto, medio, bajo). Este trabajo investiga qué características intrínsecas o constitutivas de los recursos facilitarían recombinaciones menos o más novedosas, y por qué ocurriría esto. Metodológicamente, se usó la construcción de tipologías explicativas como herramienta teórica. Según la tipología de características intrínsecas construida, la literatura se basa en recursos existentes. Se asociarían con recombinaciones y productos poco novedosos. Para que hubiera alta novedad, se requerirían características intrínsecas que facilitaran recombinar recursos tangibles y conocimiento para formar recursos nuevos. Aunque, las características intrínsecas más frecuentes promoverían recombinaciones y productos de novedad media. La tipología ayudaría a las empresas a evaluar ex ante el potencial innovador de sus recursos, y así la novedad al recombinar y de producto que facilitarían. Contribuye con la literatura al proponer que los recursos son más que conocimiento existente y son intrínsecamente heterogéneos. Los recursos tangibles también serían esenciales para crear novedad. Al respecto, las recombinaciones no serían siempre novedosas. Habría relaciones específicas entre tipos de recursos, novedad de recombinaciones, y novedad de productos. Se presentan proposiciones teóricas y un modelo formal que sugieren la cuantificación y predictibilidad de estas relaciones.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Ahuja, G., y Lampert, C. M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 521–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.176

Ahuja, G., Lampert, C. M., y Tandon, V. (2008). Moving beyond Schumpeter: Management research on the determinants of technological innovation. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 1–98. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520802211446

Alvarenga, R. (2016). Study of factors contributors to death of micro and small companies in the State of Maranhão. International Journal of Innovation, 4(2), 106–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.5585/iji.v4i2.36

Arthur, W. B., y Polak, W. (2006). The evolution of technology within a simple computer model. Complexity, 11(5), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/cplx.20130

Arthur, W. B. (2007). The structure of invention. Research Policy, 36, 274–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/jrespol.2006.11.005

Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. The Free Press.

Arts, S., y Veugelers. R. (2015). Technology familiarity, recombinant novelty, and breakthrough invention. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(6), 1215–1246. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtu029

Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 496–515.

Bailey, K. D. (1994). Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques. Sage.

Barton, A. H. (1955). The concepts of property-space in social research. En P. F. Lazarsfeld, y M. Rosenberg (Eds.), The language of social research: A reader in the methodology of social research (pp. 1403–1405). The Free Press.

Bradley, S. W., Sheperd, D. A., y Wiklund, J. (2011). The importance of slack for new organizations facing ‘tough’ environments. Journal of Management Studies, 48(5), 1071–1097. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00906.x

Buchanan, M. (2015). Innovation slowdown. Nature Physics, 11, 2. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3222

Camani, J. P. (2021). The role of resources in recombinations and the degree of novelty of products. International Journal of Innovation,9(3), 522–556. https://doi.org/10.5585/iji.v9i3.19958

Christensen, J. F. (1996). Innovative assets and inter–asset linkages: A resource–based approach to innovation. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 4(3), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599600000009

Christensen, J. F. (2000). Building innovate assets and dynamic coherence in multi–technology companies. En N. J. Foss, y P. L. Robertson (Eds.), Resource, technology and strategy: Explorations in the resource–based perspective (pp. 123–152). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203982259

Collier, D.; LaPorte, J., y Seawright, J. (2012). Putting typologies to work: Concept formation, measurement, and analytic rigor. Political Research Quarterly, 65(1), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912912437162

Cornelissen, J. P. (2017). Editor´s comments: developing propositions, a process model, or a typology? Addressing the challenges of writing theory without a boilerplate. Academy of Management Review, 42(1), 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0196

Cornelissen, J. P., y Durand, R. (2014). Moving forward: Developing theoretical contributions in management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 51(6), 995–1002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joms.12078

Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1095–1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.275

Delbridge, R., y Fiss, P. C. (2013). Editor´s comment: Styles of theorizing and the social organization of knowledge. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 325–331. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0085

Denrell, J., Fang, C., y Winter, S. G. (2003). The economics of strategic opportunity. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 977–990. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.341

D'Este, P., Marzucchi, A., y Rentocchini, F. (2017). Exploring and yet failing less: Learning from past and current exploration in R&D. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(3), 525–553. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtx044

Donaldson, L., Qiu, J., y Luo, B. N. (2013). For rigour in organizational management theory research. Journal of Management Studies, 50(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01069.x

Doty, D. H., y Glick, W. H. (1994). Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. The Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 230–251. https://doi.org/10.2307/258704

Dul, J. (2016). Necessary condition analysis (NCA): Logic and methodology of ‘‘necessary but not sufficient’’ causality. Organizational Research Methods, 19(1) 10–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115584005

Elman, C. (2005) Explanatory typologies in qualitative studies of international politics. International Organization, 59(2), 293–326. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050101

Elsban, K. D., y Van Knippenberg, D. (2020). Creating high-impact literature reviews: An argument for ‘integrative reviews’. Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1277–1289. https://doi:10.1111/joms.12581

Eppler, M.J., Hoffmann, F., y Pfister, R. (2011). Rigor and relevance in management typologies: Assessing the quality of qualitative classifications (mcm Working paper No 1/2011). mcm institute, University of St. Gallen.www.knowledge-communication.org

Echterhoff, N., Amshoff, B., y Gausemeier, J. (2013). Cross–industry innovations–Systematic identification of ideas for radical problem solving. International Journal of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, 7(2), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1083853

Fiss, P. C. (2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.60263120

Fitzgerald, E., Wankerl, A., y Schramm, C. (2011). Inside real innovation: How the right approach can move ideas from R&D to market — and get the economy moving. World Scientific Publishing.

Fleming, L. (2001). Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science, 47(1), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.1.117.10671

Fleming, L., y Giudicati, G. G. (2018). Recombination of knowledge. En M. Augier, y D. J. Teece (Eds.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of strategic management (pp. 1403–1405). Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2

Forés, B., y Camisón, C. (2016). Does incremental and radical innovation performance depend on different types of knowledge accumulation capabilities and organizational size? Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 831–848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.07.006

Foss, N. J., e Ishikawa, I. (2007). Towards a dynamic resource–based view: Insights from Austrian capital and entrepreneurship theory. Organization Studies, 28(5), 749–777. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607072546

Foss, N. J., y Klein, P. G. (2012). Organizing entrepreneurial judgment: A new approach to the firm. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139021173

Galunic, D. C., y Rodan, S. (1998). Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 1193–1201. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(1998120)19:12<1193::AID-SMJ5>3.0.CO;2-F

Garcia, R., y Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: A literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0737-6782(01)00132-1

Gassmann, O., y Zeschky, M. (2008). Opening up the solution space: The role of analogical thinking for breakthrough product innovation. Creativity and Innovation Management,17(2), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2008.00475.x

Godin, B. (2017). Models of innovation: The history of an idea. MIT Press.

Greenacre, M., y Primicerio, R. (2013). Multivariate analysis of ecological data. Fundación BBVA.

Henderson, R. M., y Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393549

Jaccard, J., y Jacoby, J. (2020). Theory construction and model-building skills: A practical guide for social scientists (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.

Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., y Lundvall, B. A. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy, 36, pp.680–693. https://doi:10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.006

Kalthaus, M. (2020). Knowledge recombination along the technology lifecycle. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 30(3), 643–704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-020-00661-z

Kang, T., Baek, C., y Lee, J. (2019). Effects of knowledge accumulation strategies through experience and experimentation on firm growth. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 144, 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.04.003

Kline, S., y Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. En R. Landau, y N. Rosenberg (Eds.), The positive sum strategy: Harnessing technology for economic growth (pp. 275–306). National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.17226/612

Kok, H.; Faems, D., y de Faria, P. (2019). Dusting off the knowledge shelves: Recombinant lag and the technological value of inventions. Journal of Management, 45(7), 2807–2836. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318765926

Kyriakopoulos, K., Hughes, M., y Hughes, P. (2015). The role of marketing resources in radical innovation activity: Antecedents and payoffs. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(4), 398–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12285

Laursen, K., y Salter, A. J. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovative performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507

Lee, L., y Barney, J. B. (2018). Strategic factor markets. En M. Augier, y D. J. Teece (Eds.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of strategic management (pp. 519–521). Palgrave MacMillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2

Lewin, P. (2011). Capital in desequilibrium: The role of capital in a changing world. Ludwig Von Mises Institute.

Majchrzak, A., Cooper, L. P., y Neece, O. E. (2004). Knowledge reuse for innovation. Management Science, 50(2), 174–188. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1030.0116

March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

McGregor, S. L. T. (2018). Understanding and evaluating research: A critical guide. Sage. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781071802656

Mets, T, Trabskaja, J., y Raudsaar, M. (2019). The entrepreneurial journey of venture creation: reshaping process and space. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda época, 1, 61–77. https://dx.doi.org/10.17561/ree.v2019n1.4

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., y Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.975966

Morero, A. H., Borrastero, C., y Motta, J. J. (2015). Procesos de innovación en la producción de software en Argentina. Un estudio de caso. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda época, 2, 24–48. https://dx.doi.org/10.17561/ree.v0i2.2739

Mukherjee, S., Uzzi, B., Jones, B., y Stringer, M. (2016). A new method for identifying recombinations of existing knowledge associated with high–impact innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 33(2), 224–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12294

Nelson, R. R., y Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. The Belknap Press.

Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14

O’Raghallaigh, P., Sammon, D., y Murphy, C. (2010). Theory-building using typologies – A worked example of building a typology of knowledge activities for innovation. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 212, 371–382. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-576-1-371

Platero Jaime, M. (2015). Revisión y adaptación del concepto “innovación” al contexto empresarial español. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda época, 2, 5–23. https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.v0i2.2737

Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Blackwell.

Popadiuk, S., y Choo, C. W. (2006). Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related? International Journal of Information Management, 26(4), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2006.03.011

Savino, T., Messeni Petruzzelli, A., y Albino, V. (2017). Search and recombination process to innovate: A review of the empirical evidence and a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(1), 54–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12081

Schneider, C. Q., y Wagemann, C. (2012). Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139004244

Schriber, S., y Löwstedt, J. (2018). Managing asset orchestration: A processual approach to adapting to dynamic environments. Journal of Business Research, 90(9), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.027

Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles. McGraw–Hill.

Si, S., y Chen, H. (2020). A literature review of disruptive innovation: What it is, how it works and where it goes. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 56(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101568

Snow, C. C., y Ketchen, D. J. (2014). Typology-driven theorizing. A response to Delbridge and Fiss. Academy of Management Review, 39(2), 231–233. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0388

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Sun, M., y Jiang, H. (2017). Innovating by combining: A process model. Procedia Engineering, 174(5), 595–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.01.193

Thomke, S. H. (1998). Managing experimentation in the design of new products. Management Science, 44(6), 743–762.

Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606

Warnier, V., Weppe, X., y Lecocq, X. (2013). Extending resource–based theory: Considering strategic, ordinary and junk resources. Management Decision, 51(7), 1359–1379. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2012-0392

Weber, M. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. The Free Press

Weitzman, M. L. (1998). Recombinant growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(2), 331–360. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355398555595

Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 490–495. https://doi.org/10.2307/258554

Youn, H., Strumsky, D., Bettencourt, L. M. A., y Lobo, J. (2015). Invention as a combinatorial process: evidence from US patents. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 12(106), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2015.0272

Zeppini, P., y Van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2013). Optimal diversity in investments with recombinant innovation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 24(1), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2012.09.002

Publicado

2023-03-16

Cómo citar

Camani, J. P. (2023). Novedad de productos y características intrínsecas de los recursos en la innovación. Revista De Estudios Empresariales. Segunda Época, (1), 53–83. https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.n1.2023.7097

Número

Sección

TRIBUNA